|
|
Posted by mv on 01/11/06 18:34
In message <gmaxf.1402$ee6.328@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>, Steve
Guidry <steveguidry@earthlink.net> writes
>
>>
>> > Whilst as a rule of thumb it's true that the bigger the chip the better
>> > the image, the argument breaks down when comparing early 2/3rd CCD's
>> > with the latest HAD 1/3rd types.
>> >
>>
>> That is EXACTLY what i wanted to know! Thank you.
>
>
>There are none so blind as they who _want_ to believe that you get
>something for nothing. And no better target for snake oil salesmen . . .
>
>Look at it for yourself before taking someone's word from a USENET group.
>
>
>
I'd agree that one should not rely on Internet snake oil salesmen.
Definitely don't make any commitment, financial or otherwise without
checking the facts first hand. There is the problem though of knowing
when ones first hand experience is definitive or otherwise. Many times
I've been presented with the results of spurious 'tests' that have been
biased one way or the other by various combinations of wishful thinking,
vested interest or simply the wrong equipment used for making those
tests.
Currently there's nothing confusing the innocent as much as the rear
guard actions, by the otherwise over capitalised, against HDV and
particularly the Z1. Very few cameras provide all round perfection,
there's always some niggle such as the limitations of the fixed lens or
in HDV's case the fact that there's still only one suitable edit system,
and it's not Avid or FCP or any 'Native HDV' solution.
I have no axe to grind, my company has been going for over twenty years,
we use most formats and have owned lots of cameras. Right now, for
completely pragmatic and tactical reasons, we've sold all our SD
equipment accept for a DXC D30W, PVV3, DSR 1 and one each of VTR's of
most SD types. We still offer Digi Beta and SX but we hire it in as
needed. In the UK these formats are going out of fashion faster than you
can say obsolete. Only HD is worth investing in. Can't afford to buy in
the whole HDCAM infrastructure yet so that gets hired in too. We have
three Z1's and an A1 in our in-house tool bag right now, mostly used as
HDV but occasionally as DVCAM too. The 1/3rd inch Super HAD CCD's on
the Z1 compare well with the 2/3rd inch types of the old BVW Beta SP's,
though not as capable as the very latest 2/3rd types. All this stuff
about the Z1 being noisy in comparison with last generation 2/3rd inch
CCD's is utter tosh. Where the Z1 fails to match the large formats is
much more to do with lenses than CCD's. Motion blur in certain
situations is another issue, mostly not as much as some make it out to
be and even thought aesthetically pleasing by others.
The technology that's gone into the new compact Sony's are among the
most advanced available and their CCD technology remains superior to
either JVC or Panasonic by a significant margin. This quote from an
engineer is interesting;
"Theoretically 720/25p should have an advantage at 20 Mbps over Z1's
1080/50i at 25 Mbps. But the Z1 codec is 2.5x more efficient than the
DVCPRO HD codec, so 25 Mbps of Sony HDV is like 62.5 Mbps of Panasonic
DVCPRO HD, which is 100 Mbps"
The compact P2 HD being developed by Panasonic is also interesting,
though the hard disks only carry a few minutes at HD standard requiring
one to carry a very robust computer around on location to store all the
data. It will need to be significantly better than HDV to be worth the
palaver and expense.
I suspect that the next generation of low cost compacts will provide
full HDCAM quality with advanced compact lens solutions being developed
by Fujinon and Canon. Naturally the top end goal posts will be advanced
in unison with this. Most likely along the lines of the 'Super HD'
demonstrated by Arriflex Lockheed Martin, offering 5 times the
resolution and ten times the pixels of HDCAM (sic)
As I said, size does matter but usually only at a given generation of
technology. In the world of digital technology, things tend to get
smaller, faster, better and cheaper. That's what makes capital
investment, timely disposal at peak used values and reinvestment in the
next generation the essence of good business practise, unless of course
ones production work is generating such huge profits that such
depreciation and obsolescence is irrelevant.
--
John Lubran
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|